Project Spec

[The_Last_Good_Dragon]

Subject: Overview 

Date: Thu Apr  5 05:11:17 2018


Lunisda, Maritus 7, 377

The goal of the Noble Projects Spec is to give noble characters the unique
ability to kick off projects that will alter city metrics directly over the
course of two weeks.

This should encourage nobles to be seen as the city movers and shakers as
well as give them RP opportunities by seeking support for their projects.  

In a general sense, it works by a noble (potentially City Council Members
only?) defining a project and linking it to a city metric.  They can specify
how much of a shift they want to attempt, and the game will calculate the IP
necessary for the project to succeed, and the time period in which they have
to apply the necessary IP to the project.  

Projects will be publicly visible, and players can either support or subvert
a project.  If the project succeeds, and IC Event will post proclaiming
success.  If it fails, either nothing will happen, or detractors can post
their own IC Event post. 

I was hoping to offer a few quick $.02 on the Noble Project idea -- for those of you who might not have seen, it's a spec allowing for nobles to create 'projects' that they can dump IP into in order to help improve city metrics and stress the idea that they are a meaningful part of the 'city movers' not currently reflected. Love it! I have a few thoughts/suggestions to the basic idea though that I wanted to fly out here:
 
 (1) Have the Noble get a GL approval. Any public GL would do, though ofc it should make sense. This will give them a clear path to creating more RP around the project and drive home the idea that the Guilds matter in this as well; as it stands I worry that nobles will just throw up a project and people will just throw up RP without getting any meaningful RP around it. This would enable nobles to maybe strike IC deals with Guilds, or vice-versa, in order to garner more support and tangible reward for assisting. It would help bring some desperately-needed RP to 'Council'-style things.
 
 (2) Ensure the IP costs are -extremely- high for projects. IP is a currency that has very, very few uses right now; this would clearly become the central use for it once it goes in, outside of Seneschal elections. People wouldn't have much reason NOT to help with projects, and I expect it won't be too hard to get influential people on board with improving the city. Make sure the projects feel like things striven towards, rather than things we can just dismissively put IP into and forget about.
 
 (3) Ensure the 'villians' of the game get their fun, too. Not only by subverting existing projects (a probably futile thing, given that 'most' people will be playing characters that want to do good things most likely) but also create covert projects of their own to work against the city's interest. I would think the Tenebrae, and maybe even Champion-level mages, should be able to do projects as well. While these probably shouldn't have the potential impact of noble projects, it'd be nice to give them some love, too.
 
 (4) Ensure contributions to projects are also publicly visible. It could work sort of like the rumor system already does: a large project header detailing the general goal, and then allow those who contribute IP for or against to add their own blurbs about what their IP is being spent on. For example, Empena might assist a noble's plot for Piety by providing more copies of the Erra Pater to injured patients, and that could be reflected publicly so people can discuss the matter. Players could list their character in their own project promote/subversion if they'd like, too, to highlight their contributions to society.

[kipperialovskii]

((Copied over from the OOC logs board, because I'm a garbage elemental that forgot how forums work))

My only suggestion is that the Noble spec be added to include the Council.

It seems weirdly exclusionary to the Council to have a strictly political move be only accessible by a class that doesn't really even need to be associated with the Council or political RP.

They're one of the strongest influences on home-turf than foreign nobility. Which is... Kinda the point of all GLs being uplifted to psuedo-nobility at minimum. Belittling a GL's authority can be awkward. Like the GI not being able to start a project for piety. Or the Justicar for lawfulness. ... Or even the Seneschal, not being able to start civic work projects. They'd have to clunkily approach a noble to start something that they would reasonably have to do, making them look pretty a bit redundant. (Especially if they're a random foreign delegate with no stakes in the Council or politics.)

Maybe have it a *Council* ability? Since half of the 1GL Councilmen and women are considered nobility anyway, and the only other people even in the Guild are nobles, it'd more-or-less have the same effect, without the alienation, but make it special to nobles, since in the end, it's something that almost strictly nobles, and high-gentry (Pseudo-nobility), and encourage interaction with the Council.

Making it a two-way street helps the Council not feel lopsided, and encourage a sentiment of working together to support (or subvert) a project, helping the retention of Nobility, and encouraging GL's to encourage said nobles to continue playing. (IE: I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine, political moves.)

Not endorsing ENTIRE freedom, mind. Just something like... Tie the 1GL role to the metric they're objectively handling. Since in the end, their power is limited to their profession and focus, unlike the complete freeform Nobles have. Maybe further encouraging people to experiment further with their Nobles, and come up with concepts that can regularly find them some fun.


Aside from that though, I think it's a great way to encourage interaction with metrics, and encourages interaction with nobles.

[Crookedvult]

So, I think i'm gonna weigh in on this. I'm suuupppper new to MUDs, but I have been a GM for some years, and one thing i've learned is that consistency is important. Saying one thing, and then doing another, is terrible for RP purposes and for ooc relations. If, in lore, a character is meant to have power, or if through positioning they give themselves a platform for power, you need to honor that.

As for GLs, they are the workforce. They effectively own those below them. But somehow, the ability to affect meaningful change does not belong to them. A character who is seen as a leader, and as an educated and powerful member of a group, should hold sway in the actions and zeitgeist of that group. As it stands now, from my perspective, this is unrepresented.

The ability to start major works should defiantly belong to those that know most about their execution and management. Now, of course, this is in moderation. Even a king is overthrown if they tries to throw their crowned head around too much. But, for example, a Grand Inquisitor calling for the cleansing of a heretical play-writes oeuvre should be well within his social ability. This, of course is a problem that crosses guild lines a bit, but, regardless, is something that Inquisitor should be able to start. The in character effects of course, are the fallout of this action, as with all things, but they should be able to start it, whether it fails or not.

TLDR: Forcing GLs to run to nobles to cause a great effect cuts down on the councils power, and invalidates the power of each individual member.

[LonelyNeptune]

I'm not really sure why projects are being introduced in the first place, given that we already have a way to affect metrics - a way that nobles aren't excluded from. If the intention is to move away from juggling IP and begging people to vote, and towards more story-driven things, why not upgrade the current metric influencing system for everyone? Why have this weird dual system?

[Kinaed]

Hmm, I was hoping to see some player responses to this post before I went back for another pass on the spec, but it's been awhile, so I'll respond and just get a wiggle on the spec:

1) Nobles getting GL approval - I'm not keen on GL approval, but I think endorsement from other nobles might be a good idea. I was hoping that the RP would be generated by the need to get people to share IP with the noble though as opposed to direct endorsements, so let me consider this a bit more - but I do agree and like the premise that these projects need to be RPed out and provide RP rather than just being backdrop stuff.

2) Ensuring IP costs are extremely high - I think they should be in excess of what a person is likely to have or make themselves, but shouldn't be so extreme that it's impossible, so yes to some striving but with an eye to stimulation and achievement rather than soul crushing costs.

3) Ensuring villains have fun - agree. Pondering opening projects up to anyone and maybe requiring noble endorsement, or city council endorsement, or something. Players, if you have an opinion on this, please speak up and let us know!

4) Ensuring contributions to projects are publicly visible - I think they should be visible optionally. I do like having projects appear in plot headers though and potentially being integrated with the plot system somehow.

[LonelyNeptune]

Some other responses: viewtopic.php?t=1776&p=12584

[Crookedvult]

From what makes sense to me, the metrics are there to act as a more concrete and longer reflecting "Stat" of the city, something that day to day events wouldn't effect so suddenly, while the major projects are meant to act as the start of things that may or may not shift those metrics. Plots can fail, after all.

[kipperialovskii]

The intent behind the suggestion isn't to remove this aspect from being considered, but more solving more than one issue by expanding upon a great idea.

'However, many gentrymen will play at being noble. With enough power and money behind them, they can often arrange for their treading into the realm of noble rights to be ignored. For example, one would be wary about pointing out a powerful guildleader's violation of sumptuary, as he could then find an entire guild set against him.


This can cause resentment amongst the nobility, who differentiate their power as something that they are entitled to. Depending on the force of personalities and the connections which each side boasts, such a conflict could fall to either side. The gentryman might be put in their place, though it is equally likely that the noble might step back to avoid the complications of crossing him.' --3/4rd paragraph of 'Help Gentry Power'.

Seems to fall directly into this matter. It just seems that it'd allow GL's to tread and cause conflict better than to just dissallow GL's as a whole to even get involved in initiating these situations. Since they are, at the end of the day, one of the more powerful Gentry on-grid. A position that *has* to be held via:
+Constant approval by active PC's.
+OOC months of climbing the guild's social ladder.
+Gentry birth class as a preference.
+Adherence to OOC code of conduct specifically for the role.

... In quite a bunch of cases, a GL can have more IP than a noble strictly based on the need for public opinion for power, which reflects their position in the immediate area.

I just feel like this would solve holes in GLship just as much as Nobleship. Such as the GI position being opened before Farra's entrance for quite the amount of time, and the resounding lack of an archbishop/etc.

[Starstarfish]

My difficulty with placing such a heavy expectation on the shoulders of noble characters is that we've had a lot of noble apps ins during the past year and a half, and none of them have really stuck around. So it seems to have led to a lot of people creating a noble character apping in, stirring up something and then disappearing/liquidating. Sometimes literally after only one or two scenes.

And I think part of it comes from:

11:57 PM May 27: [OOC] Kinky: "I think for a period, nobles were deemed boring with nothing to do and nowhere to be, but recent things like the noble project spec and the plot to shift the monarch again have sparked interest."

I'm also not sure that I understand why Court needs to be dissolved or removed (or perhaps I disagree) given that these matters are largely off screen and de-emphasised

The City Council has never had the same "feel" that by all descriptions or old logs or word from people who used to be in it that Court used to have. Court used to have more intrigue and a lot more that people could "do" for good or bad for or against other people. The City Council, speaking is not a replacement for Court. It's far less the Met Gala than a School Board meeting. Court used to appoint positions and titles that gave people IC clout - positions that new people cannot be granted and the City Council has no direct equivalent to.

So if we are going to be pushing nobles as more core to the game, and now that we've had a lot of noble-centric Court-like plot(s) are we bringing back Court as a thing? Are we going to actively try to make the City Council "feel" more like Court used to?

[Kinaed]

I think that'll be up to the Council GL.